click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121027
20121104
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
with resistance by republicans. contrast that to george w. bush. his major initiatives, war in iraq, medicare part d and no child left behind had substantial democratic support. in no child left behind, the leading liberal in the senate ted kennedy joining with president bush to push no child left behind. contrast that to the way the republicans treated barack obama and you see the total hypocrisy of that claim. >> governor, philadelphia aside obama's biggest drop off has been among middle to upper class suburban women. why do you think that is? you know the state. >> because the economy is not doing well. pennsylvania's economy has taken a nose dive since i left. when i left -- well truth is truth. when i left we were 7.4% unemployment, almost two points below the national average. we're now above the national average by a third of a point. so, it's significant. but the economy has not done well and suburban women are conscious of the economy. you'll know right away in pennsylvania, you don't have to look far to see whether this will be a close race. just look at the turnout in philadelphia. if t
economy collapsed in iowa and iowa took it out on george bush sr. we might see the opposite where the economy is weak in a lot of places but stronger in iowa. >> iowa voted for revenge. interesting. >> great reason to vote. >> to your point that's why the social consciences that's why mike huckabee and rick santorum do well in iowa. i don't think obama or romney are well suited to iowa. did i just say ohio? i meant iowa. >> iowa. >> anyway, i don't think eat of those candidates are particularly well suited because there's a strong populace strain in iowa politics. i ultimately do have it going blue if you look at the polls. romney has never led in iowa, interestingly even though as you pointsed out the democrats held a slight advantage in voting in registration numbers in 2008. they are turning out the same number in terms of early votes. they have a 60,000 vote advantage this year at this time versus in 2008 which is the same. so i think ultimately it is going to go to president obama. >> i have it going red but, again, i think we put up that chart of presidential voting history
. this was a 40-state landslide for george bush sr. in 1988. in the middle of the country, the sea of red that went blue, iowa, minnesota and wisconsin. there were local factors in the upper midwest. the farm economy collapsed in the mid-1980s and raeagan's standing was lower than it was elsewhere. republicans were push punished there for the state of economy. think about the auto bailout and the lower unemployment rate there, and i think there is a reward for obama for the sense among those voters that things are getting a little better here than maybe they otherwise would be. >> in a state that feels like it has not been than the country economically for a while, and you cannot understate how important the auto bailout political dynamic has been there. last week after she squabbled over exactly what romney said about the bailout in his op-ed, that was the most viewed "new york times" op-ed. the romney campaign is trying to project strength in ohio. john kasich came out and said romney will win ohio, but the tactics really speak and are telling a different story. they released an ad that
george bush's popularity, but it wasn't until katrina came along. and i think coalesce an argument that people were making which was that, you know, government had become sort of demonized by the bush white house and the republican congress and that we were seeing the potential effects of a government that couldn't respond in an emergency and that there was a substantive basis for that, for saying that we have to have a strong infrastructure. we have to be able to respond on a large scale quickly in a crisis. so i think to your point, yes. i think that is a fair argument to make right now. i think it's a little unfair that people are saying romney basically wants to abolish fema. there's a complicated debate that has a lot to do with sending responsibilities back to the states. i've heard people that romney basically wants to do away with fema. i don't think that's quite right. >> michael, there was a tweet yesterday that amused me from @lolgop who by the way everyone should follow. he's hysterical. he said for halloween and the five days that follow, the romney campaign is dressin
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)